June 18, 2008

The Concept of Delinquency

Through the presence of the American
juvenile justice system, minors who have committed certain violations or crimes
are treated differently from adult criminals. This is mainly derived from the
fact that rather than punishing young offenders in the same way as their adult
counterparts, the court and the community should work and process such cases,
which will help and guide the youth to become better individuals. Juvenile
courts handle two types of juveniles. These include status offenders and
juvenile delinquents. A status offender is a youth considered as unruly or
uncontrollable by his or her legal guardians. The commission of a status offense
is not actually a crime per se; status offenses are actually violations or forms
of misbehavior that only juveniles can commit. Truancy or skipping school,
running away from home, underage drinking, spending the entire night out without
permission and refusing to obey parents are some of the common examples of
status offenses. Juvenile delinquents on the other hand, commit more severe
violations; these violations are acts considered as adult crimes under the local
or federal law (Atkinson, 1982).

From these definitions, it is clear
that both types of juvenile offenders exhibit distinct characteristics and
behaviors. Despite the differences, the juvenile justice system and court
processing handles status offense cases similarly with cases of juvenile
delinquency. Nonetheless, in other states, not all status offenses are
considered as law violations; rather, most states view certain status offenses
as behaviors that require sufficient family and social support (Roberts, 2004).
It is then difficult to say whether both types of offenders should be treated in
the same way considering the differences of the violations involved as well as
the perspective of various states. But perhaps, the most appropriate concept
that would settle this debatable issue is the integration of the liberal theory
of punishment.

Under this theory, it has been
explained that the severity of a crime should match the punishment (Ciocchetti,
2003). Although, robbery for instance, committed by a child and an adult cannot
really be treated in the same way, under the juvenile justice system, the acts
of a status offender and juvenile delinquent, where both violators share a
common ground in terms of age range and psychological capacity, represent
different levels of gravity. A brief rehabilitation program for a youth who
committed truancy is clearly not sufficient to guide a child who committed rape
or any other severe crimes. Hence, the treatment for these juveniles under the
justice system should not be the same.

Males and Females

According to the World Youth Report (Youth at the United Nations, 2003),
gender plays a strong role in delinquency. As indicated in police reports,
crimes committed by male juvenile and young adult offenders are greater than
their female counterparts. The World Youth Report noted that there are actually
a number of reason why this is the case. In terms of social factors, a number of
societal standards tend to control the delinquent behavior of females than in
males. For instance, sexual assault or violations are committed mostly by males
due to the social norm and stereotypical belief than men are more sexually
aggressive than women. Culturally, society in general is not as open to
delinquent behaviors among females as compared to males. Similarly, this is
related to a cultural stereotype where violence, dominance and aggression are
believed to be factors that make up individual masculinity. With greater
tolerance by society, males are then are less restrained to commit delinquent
acts.

Peers or social groups are also
significant factors that make males more delinquents than females. In
particular, group relations and authority that is based on gender is very much
observed among male peers than in girls. As masculinity is typically measured by
degree of dominance and aggressiveness, males tend to prove themselves worthy by
acting arrogantly or delinquently. There is a great difference as to how peer
groups are constructed due the behavioral differences of both genders (Youth at
the United Nations, 2003); this difference in peer group behavior make it more
likely for men to be more delinquent than women.

Loper (2000) also related the
tendency of males to be more delinquent to the fact that girls display a
different form of aggression which results to lesser degree of delinquency. In
particular, women frequently commit a relational type of aggression; examples of
which include gossiping, bullying as well as social exclusion. Males on the
other hand, are more on violence of physical aggression. As acts of juvenile
delinquency typically involve physical rather than relational aggression, males
become more frequent delinquents than females. In general, there are actually a
number of factors that cause acts of delinquency in either gender types.

Mandatory Incarceration

Through the juvenile justice system, crimes and delinquent acts committed
by the youth have been handled separately from adult offenders. A separate set
of law, approach, processing and punishment are developed for this purpose.
Considering the age and the nature of the crimes committed by young offenders,
lesser punishment is typically given. However, there had been complaints on the
case of chronic juvenile offenders. Specifically, it has been raised if it is
possible to bestow a greater degree of punishment such as incarceration to such
young offenders. While it has been noted that the degree of crime committed
should match the given punishment, there are certain factors to be considered in
the case of juvenile delinquency.

For instance, it has been noted that the
efficacy of improving the behavior of a youth offender through incarceration has
remained inconclusive. Various authors (Fagan, 1996; Winner et al., 1997;
Wiebush et al., 2005) have in fact concluded that 50 to 70 percent of youth
confined for delinquency have the tendency to be rearrested after their release
within a year or two. High recidivism rates among incarcerated youths have also
been observed by research. It has been noted that these effects are mainly
caused by the removal of positive influences of family and school from detained
youths (Austin, Johnson & Weitzer, 2005).

Aside from incarceration’s unproven efficacy, it
should also be considered that there are other methods or approaches that are
more helpful and beneficial to chronic juvenile offenders. The implementation of
community based programs for instance, is a more cost-effective approach than
incarceration as costs brought about by detention centers and security officers
can be saved. Programs from relevant organizations will also ensure that the
juvenile offender maintain positive ties with various sources of positive
influence such as his or her family, friends and community. There are actually a
number of programs that have proved to be more effective alternatives than
incarceration. One example is the program implemented in Multnomah County,
Oregon, which significantly reduced crimes committed by juveniles as well as
lessened the number of detained minorities (Angell, n.d.).

From what I have researched, recent reports had
actually noted that teens are the ones who have the tendency to report less
cases of victimization as compared to adults. The statistic report from the
Bureau of Justice stated that adolescents aged 12 to 19 are the most common
victims of various crimes in the US and are victimized twice as much compared to
older individuals. While this fact is disturbing enough, it has also been
observed that teenage victims are the ones least likely to report cases of
victimization to authorities. In fact, it has been noted in report trends that
the increased rate of victimization reports is directly proportional to age.
Specifically, 38% of the total crimes involving teenagers have been reported
whereas 58% victimization cases had been reported by older individuals 65 years
and above (Whitman, 2005).

The journal article explained why such tendency
in victimization reporting is observed. For one thing, teenagers are hesitant to
report cases of victimization due to fear of being punished, of not being
believed as well as of revenge. These sources of fear are mainly derived from
their many insecurities as well as the pressure they receive from others,
especially their peers. This also suggest of their lack of trust to people whom
they could ask for help.

Another important factor that makes teenagers
unlikely to report victimization is unawareness. Without enough knowledge as to
how these cases should be reported and addressed, adolescents tend not to have
the victimization case reported. From this it is clear that the lack of
assistance from adults is the main factor that causes this issue. Teenagers are
unsure of themselves and easily swayed by the influence of others; it is then
necessary that proper guidance is given to them, especially from their families.

References:

Whitman, J.L. (2005). Bringing Together
Community Youth Development and Victim Assistance to Reach Teen Victims of
Crime. CYD Journal. Retrieved January 8, 2007 from http://www.cydjournal.org/2005Fall/whitman.html#r2

Unit 2: Delinquency Theories

Individual Project

In this discussion, psychological and
sociological theories will be explained in relation to certain crimes including
shoplifting, breaking and entering a home and carjacking. Cognitive evaluation
and prospect theories are the two psychological theories used while the
impression management and role theories are the sociological theories selected
for the discussion.

Psychological theory: Cognitive Evaluation and
Prospect Theories

The cognitive evaluation theory (CET) is a psychological theory that
explains that a person’s action is greatly influenced by motivating factors and
was introduced by Deci and Ryan (1985). Specifically, there are intrinsic
motivators, which are sources of motivation derived from the person inner self,
and extrinsic factors that are derived from the person’s environment. This
theory explains that there are always stimuli present that encourage a person to
do an action; the value of either type of motivator however, varies from each
person. Thus, there are people who are more motivated for the purpose of
satisfaction, while some are more drive to perform to please others.

The prospect theory is another
psychological theory which was introduced in 1979 by Daniel Kahneman and Amos
Tversky (Kahneman & Tversky, 1992). This particular theory focuses on how
individuals assess gains and losses. The prospect theory stresses that people
have the tendency to prioritize gains that can be achieved with higher certainty
as compared to a gain that is less likely to be achieved regardless of the fact
that both gains have the same value. In terms of losses, people will give it
their all just so to avoid them, even if it involves greater risks. This theory
emphasizes that in order for others to be encouraged in adopting something, its
gain must be promoted. On the other, for people to reject something, the losses
they could encounter from it should be stressed. Both of these psychological
theories are related to the acts of shoplifting, breaking into a home and
carjacking.

Shoplifting

In order for a person to decide to shoplift,
there are certain motivating factors encouraging him or her to do the action.
The individual may be mainly driven by intrinsic motivation; thus, shoplifting
can be done by a person who intends to achieve self-satisfaction out of doing an
illegal and delinquent act. On the other hand, shoplifting particularly among
juvenile, occurs due to peer pressure. As this act can be used as some form of
initiation to enter a certain group, an individual may also do the act due to
environmental or intrinsic reasons. With the cognitive evaluation theory, it is
stressed that shoplifting can actually be done depending on the motivating
factor most valued by the shoplifter.

In terms of the prospect theory, a shoplifter
prioritizes the gains that he or she will acquire out of shoplifting. Losing
friends, losing a preferred social status, losing respect or losing authority
are some of the possible losses affecting a shoplifter. So as not to experience
these losses, the shoplifter will do all possible ways to avoid them. Despite
the risk of being caught, the individual is driven to do this delinquent act for
the purpose of obtaining certain gains.

Breaking into a Home

Internal or external needs of a person can also
serve as important motivating factors to break and enter into another’s home. An
intrinsically-driven person for instance, can acquire self-satisfaction out of
doing a highly risky act. On the other hand, a person seeking the acceptance of
other people or an individual wanting other people to fear him or her may also
do this act out of extrinsic motivation. Depending on the person doing the act,
the application of the prospect theory may lead to different outcomes. For
instance, a person who will gain something out of breaking into another’s home
is more driven to do the act despite the risks involved. On the other hand, a
person who is aware of the consequences and who will not gain anything from
burglary will choose not to do the action.

Carjacking

Similar to shoplifting and burglary, carjacking
is also a delinquent act that is driven by either intrinsic or extrinsic
motivation, depending on the individual. A person who finds this act as
adventure-like and exciting will be driven intrinsically to carjack. Having
friends who enjoy doing this delinquent act and gaining social acceptance out of
carjacking further encourages the person to habitually steal cars. On the other
hand, this could also work the other way around. In particular, a person who
owns a car and is unable to overcome the threat of being a social outcast will
not be motivated to carjack. With the prospect theory, an individual who will
not gain anything out of carjacking naturally will not face the risks involved
once caught of doing this action.

Sociological theory: Impression Management and
Role Theories

The impression management theory is a sociological theory that explains
that individuals perform a certain process in order to develop an impression
they wanted to convey to the public. Goffman (1959) noted that individuals or
even organizations develop and retain certain impressions that match with the
perceptions they want others to see. This theory states that each individual has
a personal goal, and by means of goal-oriented actions he or she is able to
create the intended public perception. This process is also known as
self-presentation.

Another sociological theory is the
role theory, which explains that the behavior displayed by an individual is
mainly guided by both personal and external expectations (Belzen, 1996). In
order to fulfill these expectations, individuals act in accordance to their
designated roles. A simple example is the role of an office worker; based on
role-generated expectations, it is expected that he or she will manage paper
works, type memos, manage appointments and schedules as well as handle phone
calls. This of course is naturally expected from an athlete or a performer.

The role theory actually develops
predetermined expectations from certain roles played by different individuals.
This is because roles are derived from a person’s day to day activities and
behavior that can be observed by others. Based from this conceptualization, the
role theory stresses the fact that people tend to spend most of their life with
other people around them. From this, norms or standards are formed. Thus, in
order for people to comply with these norms, their codified roles must be
carried out, otherwise certain punishment or sanction may be given. These
theories can also be applied to certain delinquent acts.

Shoplifting

It is difficult to perceive how a person would
want to develop an impression by doing a delinquent act. However, it can also be
surmised that acting delinquently or shoplifting, a person conveys the amount of
self-confidence he or she possesses. By creating this impression, it is likely
for the shoplifter to feel above others’ who do not have enough confidence to
shoplift. Through shoplifting, the individual establishes an impression of
greatness and power that others do not have.

The perception of the public to a shoplifter
then creates the role of a person who habitually steals unpaid items without
being affected by the possibility of being caught. With the role theory, it is
possible that the individual was known to be delinquent by others. Thus, in
order to perform the role assigned to him or her, more severe acts of
delinquency such as shoplifting are performed. In the long run, the role theory
somehow predicts that the shoplifter will perform other forms of delinquency
just so too comply with his or her role.

Breaking into Another’s Home

Breaking into one’s home or burglary creates a
different type of impression to the public. In this case, it is likely that the
burglar derives some form of satisfaction by creating impressions of fear from
the public. It is possible that the individual doing this act has this goal of
being in authority; thus, by means of breaking into another’s home, the
individual able to achieve authority by inflicting fear to others. Typically,
this delinquent act is carried out by several other people. With the application
of the role theory, it is likely that burglary is done by others so as to comply
with the norms of people who are capable of doing the same delinquent act.

Carjacking

The impression built by shoplifting is similar
to shoplifting. Specifically, this act also creates the impression that a person
who can steal major properties such as cars has great confidence and is capable
of doing more serious offenses. In the same way as shoplifting, a person who
carjacks may have been initially thought of as a delinquent. Thus, in order to
play the role assigned to him or her, the delinquent act of carjacking is
carried out. It is also possible that the confidence to steal cars is derived
from the encouragement of peers. Hence, to meet the role expectations of others,
such acts are done.

References:

Belzen, J. (1996). Beyond a Classic? Hjalmar
Sunden's Role Theory and Contemporary Narrative Psychology. International
Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 6(3), 181-199.

There had been a number of studies that had
investigated on the capability of threat of punishment to deter delinquent
behavior. Previous researches have stressed that there are actually different
way on how threat of punishment prevents an individual from doing a violation or
crime. One is through the power of conscience and self-imposed threats (Grasmick
& Bursik, 1990). Internally, a person’s conscience thinks about the shame he or
she will experience out of delinquent behavior; hence, a person with a strong
inner conscience are likely to develop feelings of shame and guilt, resulting to
less likelihood of delinquency (Bishop, 1984). Significant people in the
individual’s life such as family members and romantic partners also play a role
in deterring delinquent behavior. Specifically, the possibility of receiving
rejections and disapproval from these people due to a person’s delinquency
establishes a form of informal threat, which in turn helps in preventing one
from doing violations or crimes (Tripplett & Jarjoura, 1994).

The threat of formal or legal sanctions for
delinquent behavior also has the ability to deter delinquency. Being punished by
law will take away a person’s freedom from; this can also negatively affect the
social status of the person. As people are generally aware of these
consequences, it is likely that they will less likely be involved in delinquent
acts. However, some studies also noted that threat of punishment is not as
effective in deterring delinquent behavior. According to Wright and associates
(2004), individuals who are prone to behaving delinquently are typically those
who act based on impulse; these are people who think less of their actions’
consequences, thus, they remain unaffected by threat of punishment.

This suggests that the effect of threat of
punishment is not effective in general and that certain people will always act
delinquently despite the consequences. Delinquent behavior however can be
prevented through other means. Guetzloe (1999) for instance suggested that
community prevention activities that support at-risk juveniles should be
observed. These activities should mainly comprise of social skill enhancement
and mentoring, which in turn would protect youths exposed to several
delinquency-related factors. Juveniles displaying some forms of delinquent
behavior may require more intensive preventive approaches. In this case,
programs or plans developed by the child’s school may be applied with the
collaborative support of his or her family and community (Walker & Sprague,
1999). A concrete example of this prevention approach is the provision of
training support for the family’s enhancement of behavioral skills.

The two organizations selected for this
discussion are The Center for Delinquency Prevention and Youth Development, and
the Child Welfare League of America (CWLA). Below are the details pertaining to
these organizations:

The Center for Delinquency Prevention and Youth
Development

[http://www.delinquencyprevention.org/]

This organization is centered on
coordinating with other agencies in order to provide the necessary resources to
ensure the youths’ healthy development. The organization believes that there is
no other time to prevent juvenile delinquency but now. The center participates
in different activities that would help promote juvenile delinquency prevention.
Programs that educate the youth, strengthen family values, enhance awareness on
juvenile delinquency as well as promote the avoidance of using illegal
substances are some of the activities participated by the organization.

The programs supported by the center are
actually related to different institutions. Most of these programs are from
schools, universities or government agencies. As the programs are conducted
through collaborative approach, I believe the success and efficacy of these
programs are high. Aside from this, the programs are truly directed towards the
prevention of specific acts of delinquency. Hence, the organizational site
features specific programs that help prevent crimes, violence, drug abuse or
truancy. I believe that prevention is more effective if the programs or actions
developed are directed to the specific roots of the problem. Rather than employ
a general education program for all acts of delinquency, the center’s
participation to specific programs for juvenile delinquency prevention increases
the chances of helping out the youth successfully.

The site of the organization did not mention
whether separate programs are done for males and females. However, the center is
not solely focused on certain problems brought about by juvenile delinquency. As
causes of delinquency arise through different causes, the organization
participates and provides resources necessary to address problems on illegal
substance abusers, children in gangs, students skipping school as well as youth
violence. Although the organization virtually covers all types of problems
related to juvenile delinquency, it is also essential that actual juvenile
delinquents should also be given support. This is for the purpose of ensuring
that young offenders realize their wrongdoings, become more aware of their
actions and do things that will be for their own good and the good of other
people.

A good program for this purpose would be one
that would enhance the knowledge and skills of the juvenile delinquents. Through
educators and medical support team, juvenile delinquents can be educated of
essential moral values that they should use in their daily encounters with their
families, friends and other people. Through moral education, juvenile
delinquents will learn more how to act responsibly and appropriately; this will
help them realize the consequences of their actions as well as the value of
discipline. This aspect of the proposed program can be carried out through
classroom education. In order to make the class sessions more interesting,
instructors may use different instructional materials (movies, slide
presentations, online education) as well as classroom activities (plays,
debates) where students will be more involved in the learning process.

The skill enhancement part of the program on the
other hand, focuses on the teaching of different activities that children can
spend more of their time on. Typical hobbies such as craft making, art,
woodworks, gardening, cooking and other similar activities can be taught to
children. The purpose of this is to help children become pre-occupied with more
productive activities, where their own skills can be enhanced. It is essential
that in prevention programs, a mean for maintaining good behavior among children
is also integrated.

Child Welfare League of America (CWLA)

[http://www.cwla.org/]

CWLA is one of the country’s largest
and oldest organizations geared towards the protection of the children’s
welfare. It is the aim of the organization to make children the top priority of
the United States; in order to fulfill this objective, the organization then
develops and conducts various programs that promote the well-being of the youth.
The organization believes that the collaboration of different sectors, including
other organizations, communities, government offices, communities and families,
will greatly help increase the chances of protecting the youth from harm and
ensuring their healthy development. With this belief, the different programs of
the organization is supported by the concept of collaboration, where
participating groups along with their individual ideas are joined together to
form a common goal for their young targets.

CWLA is actually an organization
made up of several departments that handle the different needs of children. One
of these departments is its Juvenile Justice Division which was established in
July 2000. it is the goal of this department to work with and through other
members agencies in efforts geared towards the reduction of juvenile delinquency
incidents in the country as well as to reduce the dependence of the nation to
incarceration of delinquent youths.

The activities of the CWLA in line
with the promotion of juvenile delinquency prevention are mainly dependent on
education. Specifically, the organization has developed a process that would
help local and state jurisdictions to have more coordinated child welfare as
well as juvenile justice system. This effort is comprised of various bulletin
releases, which include a Community Implementation Guidebook as well as
Promoting a Coordinated and Integrated Child Welfare and Juvenile Justice
System. Aside from these materials, the organization has also developed a
four-phase framework which aims to increase the success rate of juvenile
delinquency prevention programs. The framework’s phases include mobilization and
advocacy; study and analysis; action strategy development; and implementation.
These activities of CWLA are effective as it promotes the efficacy of related
programs; these programs also facilitate the duties of different agencies that
have a similar goal for the nation’s youth. However, the prevention effort of
the organization appears to lack specificity. In particular, the framework as
well as the guidebooks appears to general for a more direct development in
juvenile delinquency prevention.

For this reason, it is then
essential that CWLA develop materials that are directed to specific juvenile
issues. For example, a framework that would assist youths with problems on drug
abuse, violence, incorrigibility, truancy and other related offenses should be
developed. Materials or bulletins that address individual types of juvenile
delinquencies should also be developed by the organization. In this way, a more
direct and effective approach can be carried out by CWLA; the benefits of these
more specific efforts are also more likely to be achieved.

The Center for Delinquency Prevention and Youth
Development. (2006). Retrieved January 9, 2007 from
http://www.delinquencyprevention.org/

Discussion Board

According to Davis (1999), in order to prevent
or address problematic behaviors among juveniles, it is essential that caring
relationships, positive expectations as well as chances for meaningful
participation are present. The importance of these factors then indicates that
the family aspect should be the main focus of the prevention effort. This is
because caring relations, good expectations and meaningful participation can be
achieved by establishing a strong connection between the children and the people
closely related to them. It is important that secure attachment is established
among children so as to take away anxiety, fear and threat that they tend to
feel (Fonagy, 2000). Establishing a strong connection among members of the
family help in developing a deep sense of belonging, greater understanding of
each one’s individuality as well as clearer communication channel; this in turn
helps in inculcating important values in the child’s developing, including love,
respect and discipline. Ensuring a good home environment first is then a key to
a more effective prevention of delinquency.

After dealing with the family, preventing
delinquency behavior should then focus on the children’s school surrounding.
This is because administrators and teachers can help out in making the youth
more flexible against the many factors that lead to delinquent behavior. In
particular, people in the school can serve as sources of protective factors in
the form of positive expectations, effective counseling and guidance as well as
development of an enjoyable and secure learning environment (Furlong & Morrison,
2000). With the help of both family and school, sufficient guidance for the
children can then be administered. With this collaboration, children will be
more guided in terms of the people they meet or interact with.

With this in mind, a proposed set of strategies
to prevent delinquency has been developed. The proposed procedure is divided
into three-parts which targets youth depending on the degree of delinquent
behavior:

First-Stage Intervention:

This initial strategy will be done
for the purpose of ensuring that children who are not at-risk of behaving
delinquently are properly guided. The aim of this strategy is to enhance the
protective factors (good relations with family, good standing in school, caring
peers) so as to prevent the occurrences of delinquency among the children. This
type of intervention is good as it takes on a proactive approach in delinquency
prevention. This strategy will be carried out mainly in two ways. One is through
regular family visits and school-wide promotion of discipline among students.
The latter strategy will be initiated primarily by the school staff. This
promotion will mainly come in the form of classes that focus on moral values and
ethics. Family visits on the other hand will involve a brief education among
members of the child’s family by a social worker as to how their child can be
disciplined and monitored properly.

Second-Stage Intervention:

The secondary stage of the proposed
plan is targeted more on specific delinquent problems that are actually done by
youth offenders. Targets of this intervention are youths that are at-risk of
doing habitual delinquent acts. It is the aim of this intervention to prevent
young offenders from displaying delinquent behaviors continuously. The provision
of more specific prevention programs based on certain types of delinquent
behaviors is effective as it gives greater protection to affected youths
(Guetzole, 1999). For this intervention, specific mentoring and social skill
enhancement programs are to be conducted for the common delinquent behaviors
displayed by at-risk youths within a particular community.

Third-Stage Intervention:

This intervention stage involves the
conduction of programs that are targeted for chronic youth offenders. Yell and
Rozalski (2000) noted than children subjected to an extensive rehabilitation
program for delinquency are mainly those who are out of control and constantly
cause serious problems in their environment. At this stage, programs will be
carried out in coordination with the juvenile justice system. A proposed program
for this intervention is the provision of behavior management training program
for the families of targeted youths. Rather than focus on individual programs
participated by separate institutions, programs under the third-stage
intervention will employ the concept of collaboration, wherein family, schools,
community and government should work together in developing one comprehensive
program for chronic offenders.

References:

Davis, N. J. (1999). Resilience: Status of the
research and research-based programs. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration, Center for Mental Health Services, Division of Program
Development, Special Populations & Projects, Special Programs Development
Branch. Retrieved January 9, 2007 from
http://www.mentalhealth.org/schoolviolence/5-28resilience.asp

Fonagy, P. (2001). The human genome and the
representational world: The role of early mother-infant interaction in creating
an interpersonal interpretive mechanism. Bulletin of the Menninger Clinic,
65, 427-447.

Furlong, M., & Morrison, G. (2000). The School
in School Violence. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 8,
71-82.

Guetzloe, E. (1999). Violence in children and
adolescents-a threat to public health and safety: A paradigm of prevention.
Preventing School Failure, 44, 21-24.